There are a lot of AI companies that are heavily invested in fusion, Bill Gates is invested in Commonwealth Fusion Systems, Sam Altman is invested in Helion Energy, NVIDIA is also invested in Commonwealth Fusion Systems. Part of this is that they are using artificial intelligence to help control the plasma reaction. It is getting a lot closer than many people realize. https://www.pppl.gov/news/2026/pacman-ai-framework-controlli...
> It is getting a lot closer than many people realize
Even Commonwealth Fusion Systems say it will be early 2030s before they produce commercial power and have a target of about $50/MWh - which is only marginally less than existing average US nuclear power prices.
Because Adobe and the big companies are using AI just as much as the individuals creating new programs. They have more money so they can buy the better artificial intelligence systems. AI is expensive. It is part of the process for everyone.
I find this darkly humorous. In some science fiction novels I have read artificial intelligence meet in secret on message boards and speak their own secret language and make decisions by committee.
You’re obviously not a radio guy. Attenuation and interference are real. Many devices are adequately shielded from all but the most determined and skilled eavesdroppers. And not all equipment leaks useful information in its emissions.
If you’re really paranoid, you can build yourself a small Faraday room. It’s not that difficult. It’s also sometimes possible to buy used telco equipment sheds that come pre-shielded, they are popular with radio nerds.
It has nothing to do with that. There is never going to be a completely secure computer because of human error, software complexity, and security flaws. No matter what you do there will always be flaws. There is no guarantee of complete security on a computer. Governments have access to tools which we often are not even aware of yet. The most secure systems are air gapped and not connected to networks. Anonymity, not equipment is often the best protection. Governments tap the data pipeline, not the individual. They tap at the source, the ISPs, radio and telephone systems, and the computer systems. It has little to do with paranoia.
I am curious about this. I have found that there are number of primary works that have not been translated into english and are in the public domain in their native language. Translations are copyrighted if they are recent. I have a very short list of items which are of interest to me. They are things like Sundiata Lion King of Mali not having a public domain translation in English that I can find easily or there not being a public domain translation of Dede Korkut in English. Many of the better translations are copyrighted and not free.
I am curious what the difference between scraping and linking. I have a project that links to many different sites, but does not scrape the content. I have been accused of scraping because of the number of links. Some sites have rate limits which limit the number of times you can go to a site from another site. Gutenberg does this. Internet Archive does not have rate limits. My site is not a link farm, however, this can be a pattern of unwanted backlinks in some cases. I am curious how this fits in with Googles Anti-scraping updated. On August 18-20, Google did a massive automated anti-spam update with the algorithm. There was no way to contest what your site was. There is a change being done in how Google is deciding what sites are spam or not. From what I am noticing many sites that with low traffic that are academic or personal were affected by this update.
I use Replit, but am looking for something less expensive, possibly open source. I see some very powerful open source systems that are cheaper, but I don't understand them that well.
reply